The measure, which was passed in November
with 58% support, was the most expensive in
state history with Uber, Lyft and other services
pouring $200 million in support of it. Labor
unions, who joined drivers in the lawsuit, spent
about $20 million to challenge it.
“Prop. 22 doesn’t just fail our state rideshare
drivers, it fails the basic test of following our
state constitution,” said Bob Schoonover of the
SEIU union. “The law as written by Uber and Lyft
denies drivers rights under the law in California
and makes it nearly impossible for lawmakers to
fix these problems.”
Drivers bringing the lawsuit have several hurdles
to clear, but their arguments are compelling,
said Mary-Beth Moylan, associate dean of
McGeorge Law School in Sacramento.
The first challenge is getting the California
Supreme Court to take the case instead of
kicking it to lower courts to weigh the facts. To
do so, the high court would have to find the
arguments are legal, not factual, and there is
urgency to decide the issue, Moylan said.
The second challenge is that courts have
generally granted broad deference to voters to
pass such initiatives.
“Generally speaking, courts in California don’t
like to overturn the will of the people,” Moylan
said. “But the petitioners’ claim is that the
people did not really have the power to do
what they did. There are instances where the
California courts have come in and said ... it’s
nice that this is what the people wanted to
do, but our constitution doesn’t permit the
people to do this.”